The Supreme Court today struck down a federal law that attempted to offset the advantage of wealthy candidates who finance their own campaigns by giving benefits, including higher contribution limits, to their opponents.

I haven’t yet read the decision itself, but initial news reports indicate that the court soundly rejected the idea of “leveling the playing field” by providing unequal electoral conditions.

Unfortunately, this is precisely the approach taken by the bill passed by the Legislature this year to implement an experiment in public financing of the Hawaii County Council elections beginning in 2010.

HB 661 is awaiting Governor Lingle’s signature. However, this Supreme Court decision appears to challenge the underpinning of the law–the idea that steps should be taken to artificially “level the playing field” among candidates. Imposing potentially burdensome reporting requirements on non-publicly funded candidates may be just one of the mechanisms inconsistent with this latest court decision.

I’m sure we’ll be seeing comments from other jurisdictions that have similar systems in place as the impact of today’s decision percolates out.